Skip to main content
Federal Court· 2001

Lavoie v. Canada

2001 FCT 567
GeneralJD
Cite or share
Share via WhatsAppEmail
Showing the official court-reporter headnote. An editorial brief (facts · issues · held · ratio · significance) is on the roadmap for this case. The judgment text below is the authoritative source.

Court headnote

Lavoie v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2001-05-31 Neutral citation 2001 FCT 567 File numbers T-2048-00 Decision Content Date: 20010531 Docket: T-2048-00 Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 567 BETWEEN: MICHEL LAVOIE Applicant - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER BLAIS J. [1] There are two motions before the Court: one by the applicant, for a default judgment pursuant to his action filed November 3, 2000, given that the respondent has not filed any defence to his action. [2] On the other hand, the Court also has before it a motion by the respondent to strike out the applicant's motion for default judgment. [3] Let us briefly recall the facts. On December 8, 2000, the respondent served on the applicant a motion to strike out certain allegations and conclusions in the applicant's statement of claim. [4] On March 2, 2001, Prothonotary Richard Morneau dismissed the motion to strike out presented by the respondent and ordered that the defence be filed within thirty days. [5] On March 30, 2001, the respondent served the applicant with a motion for particulars, which was dismissed by the Court today. [6] The respondent argues that its filing of the motion for particulars constitutes an application for extension of time; I note that the respondent did not request any additional time in which to be able to comply with the order of Prothonotary Morneau, but in the circumstances it is legitimate to think that the respondent could hardly fi…

Read full judgment
Lavoie v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2001-05-31
Neutral citation
2001 FCT 567
File numbers
T-2048-00
Decision Content
Date: 20010531
Docket: T-2048-00
Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 567
BETWEEN:
MICHEL LAVOIE
Applicant
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
BLAIS J.
[1] There are two motions before the Court: one by the applicant, for a default judgment pursuant to his action filed November 3, 2000, given that the respondent has not filed any defence to his action.
[2] On the other hand, the Court also has before it a motion by the respondent to strike out the applicant's motion for default judgment.
[3] Let us briefly recall the facts. On December 8, 2000, the respondent served on the applicant a motion to strike out certain allegations and conclusions in the applicant's statement of claim.
[4] On March 2, 2001, Prothonotary Richard Morneau dismissed the motion to strike out presented by the respondent and ordered that the defence be filed within thirty days.
[5] On March 30, 2001, the respondent served the applicant with a motion for particulars, which was dismissed by the Court today.
[6] The respondent argues that its filing of the motion for particulars constitutes an application for extension of time; I note that the respondent did not request any additional time in which to be able to comply with the order of Prothonotary Morneau, but in the circumstances it is legitimate to think that the respondent could hardly file its statement of defence before knowing the Court's decision on its motion for particulars.
[7] Consequently, THE COURT ORDERS:
- That the motion for default judgment be dismissed without costs;
- That the motion to strike out the motion for default judgment be dismissed for mootness, the whole without costs;
- That an additional thirty days be given to the respondent in which to serve and file its statement of defence in this matter.
Pierre Blais
J.
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
May 31, 2001
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET NO: T-2048-00
STYLE: MICHEL LAVOIE
- and -
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
WRITTEN MOTIONS EXAMINED WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF THE PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER OF BLAIS J.
DATED: May 31, 2001
WRITTEN OBSERVATIONS BY:
Michel Lavoie REPRESENTING HIMSELF
Sébastien Gagné FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT

Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca

Related cases